Last visit was: 06 Sep 2026, 04:34 It is currently 06 Sep 2026, 04:34
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2 
655-705 (Hard)|   Weaken|         
User avatar
madhavbhaskar
User avatar
Joined: 26 Aug 2019
Last visit: 01 Apr 2026
Posts: 3
Given Kudos: 21
Location: India
Schools: LBS '26 INSEAD Aug '26 CBS '26 Stern '26 Kellogg '26 Wharton '26
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q81 V81 DI83
GPA: 7.78
Schools: LBS '26 INSEAD Aug '26 CBS '26 Stern '26 Kellogg '26 Wharton '26
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q81 V81 DI83
Posts: 3
Kudos: 0
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods 25 Sep 2025, 02:02
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
On X-->Y questions, aren't the ways to undermine the causal link between X and Y.

  1. Provide alternative cause.
    • Y could actually be due to Z, not X.
  2. Reverse causation.
    • Maybe Y → X instead of X → Y.
    • E.g., Faster recovery patients are more likely to be prescribed Drug X.
  3. Show correlation without causation.
    • X and Y both caused by a third factor.
  4. Show counterexamples.
    • X happens but Y does not. Or Y happens without X.
  5. Challenge mechanism.
    • Show X cannot plausibly cause Y (contradicts biology, physics, etc.).
  6. Control groups / data flaws.
    • The data linking X → Y is biased, incomplete, or inaccurately measured.

In this case, for option (E), isn't it Z --> Y (sharp improvement in the efficiency of darfir's manufacturing plants will lead to darfir's products a bargain on the world markets even without weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies) weakening the case fir X -->Y.

KarishmaB

It is a 'weaken the plan' question.

Plan: When currency weakens, exports increase. (Foreigners can buy more using same amount of their currencies so they buy more.) Therefore, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Aim: to cause another similarly sized increase in exports

Focus on the highlighted words. The aim is to cause a similarly sized increase in exports. That is what the plan is trying to achieve. On weaken questions, we focus on the conclusion. What the plan is trying to achieve is parallel to conclusion. So we focus on trying to weaken what the plan is trying to achieve. We need to find something that tells us why we will not get a similarly sized increase in exports even if we weaken pundra.

Options a, c, d and e do not talk about the reasons we will not see similarly sized increase in exports.
Option B tells us that darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels. If this is true, exports cannot increase much because darfir cannot manufacture more than it is manufacturing now. If there are no extra products manufactured, there cannot be extra exports. In previous instances, darfir was manufacturing below capacity so they could manufacture extra products. Hence the plan worked in those instances but this time it may not. Therefore, option (B) is correct.­

A. Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.



This doesn’t weaken the plan. If anything, it lends a bit more credence that these experts perhaps know what they are talking about!



B. After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.



If Darfir’s manufacturing sector is operating at peak, it is very unlikely that it can support much increase in exports. So even if the currency weakens, the exports may not increase much. In previous two instances, Darfir was manufacturing below capacity so they could manufacture extra products. Hence the plan worked in those instances but this time it may not. It weakens our plan.
Correct. 



C. The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.



The aim is not a healthier economy but instead increased exports. So, this is irrelevant. 



D. Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.



The point is - will allowing pundra to become weak lead to increase in exports?



E. A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.



What else can lead to increase in exports is irrelevant.

Answer (B)

Weaken questions are discussed here:

­
Show more
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 05 Sep 2026
Posts: 6,291
Own Kudos:
33,901
 [1]
Given Kudos: 716
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 6,291
Kudos: 33,901
 [1]
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods 26 Sep 2025, 01:07
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
madhavbhaskar
On X-->Y questions, aren't the ways to undermine the causal link between X and Y.

  1. Provide alternative cause.
    • Y could actually be due to Z, not X.
  2. Reverse causation.
    • Maybe Y → X instead of X → Y.
    • E.g., Faster recovery patients are more likely to be prescribed Drug X.
  3. Show correlation without causation.
    • X and Y both caused by a third factor.
  4. Show counterexamples.
    • X happens but Y does not. Or Y happens without X.
  5. Challenge mechanism.
    • Show X cannot plausibly cause Y (contradicts biology, physics, etc.).
  6. Control groups / data flaws.
    • The data linking X → Y is biased, incomplete, or inaccurately measured.

In this case, for option (E), isn't it Z --> Y (sharp improvement in the efficiency of darfir's manufacturing plants will lead to darfir's products a bargain on the world markets even without weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies) weakening the case fir X -->Y.


Show more
madhavbhaskar Good to see your understanding on these questions. Your list of ways to weaken X -->Y arguments is spot-on. However, there's a subtle distinction you're missing with option (E).

Option (E) is not actually weakening the causal relationship X → Y (weak pundra → increased exports). Instead, it's offering an alternative path to the same destination.

What "Alternative Cause" Actually Means in Weakening:

- True alternative cause: "The past export increases were actually due to Z, not the weak pundra"
- What (E) says: "In the future, Z could also lead to export increases"

See the difference? A true alternative causes challenges what caused past events. Option (E) doesn't dispute that weak pundra caused past export increases - it just says there's another way to achieve the goal in the future.

Why This Matters:

The question asks what gives grounds to doubt the recommendation will achieve its aim. Option (E) doesn't explain why weakening the pundra wouldn't work - it just offers a different solution that would also work.

Think of it this way: If I say "Taking the highway will get you downtown faster," and you respond "Well, the subway could also get you downtown faster" - you haven't weakened my claim about the highway. You've just offered an alternative route.

You can practice similar questions here (you'll find a lot of OG questions) - select Critical Reasoning under Verbal and select Weaken questions to practice. You can choose more types and further filter based on the difficulty level.
User avatar
Qverbi
User avatar
Joined: 09 Mar 2021
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 54
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 10
Posts: 54
Kudos: 2
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods 31 Jan 2026, 08:43
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi KarishmaB

My confusion: To justify option B (presumably arguing Drafir's exports will increase when Pundra weakens), don't we need to assume all manufactured goods are currently being exported?

My reasoning:

Drafir might be at "peak production capacity" (100 goods)

But current exports could be lower (70 goods) due to market limits/competition

When Pundra weakens, Drafir could export more of its existing production (100; or anything more than 70/100) without needing extra capacity

Question: If this is true, why does peak production matter? Couldn't exports grow purely from market share gain, regardless of capacity status?

What logical gap am I missing, and how can I avoid this in CR questions?
User avatar
guddo
User avatar
Joined: 25 May 2021
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 1,829
Own Kudos:
14,385
 [1]
Given Kudos: 32
Posts: 1,829
Kudos: 14,385
 [1]
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods 31 Jan 2026, 09:42
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
SanketPatil
Hi KarishmaB

My confusion: To justify option B (presumably arguing Drafir's exports will increase when Pundra weakens), don't we need to assume all manufactured goods are currently being exported?

My reasoning:

Drafir might be at "peak production capacity" (100 goods)

But current exports could be lower (70 goods) due to market limits/competition

When Pundra weakens, Drafir could export more of its existing production (100; or anything more than 70/100) without needing extra capacity

Question: If this is true, why does peak production matter? Couldn't exports grow purely from market share gain, regardless of capacity status?

What logical gap am I missing, and how can I avoid this in CR questions?
Show more
You do not need to assume all output is already exported. Option B works because the politicians want another similarly sized increase, and exports cannot rise beyond what firms can supply without either (1) increasing total output or (2) diverting a big chunk from domestic sales.

If manufacturing is already near peak, total output has little room to expand, so a large export jump would require large diversion from the home market. The argument gives you no reason to think that much domestic supply can or will be freed up, so B gives strong grounds to doubt the plan will reliably hit the target.

To avoid this: when you see “it worked before, so do it again,” immediately check what could now be a bottleneck (capacity, inputs, regulation, demand).
User avatar
Edskore
User avatar
Joined: 29 Dec 2022
Last visit: 05 Aug 2026
Posts: 403
Own Kudos:
224
 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
Posts: 403
Kudos: 224
 [1]
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods 31 Jan 2026, 10:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Step-by-Step Solution

Step 1: Understand the politicians' argument: A weak currency previously boosted exports because it made products cheaper. They believe doing it again will work.

Step 2: Identify what we need to find: A reason why weakening the currency *won't* boost exports this time, as it did before.

Step 3: Analyze the options to see which one breaks the link between a weak currency and increased exports. The previous success depended on Darfir being able to *produce more* when prices dropped.

Step 4: Option B shows that Darfir's factories might not be able to produce more, regardless of price, because they are already busy. This means a weak currency won't lead to a big export increase if production can't keep up.

Answer: After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 05 Sep 2026
Posts: 16,645
Own Kudos:
81,195
Given Kudos: 491
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,645
Kudos: 81,195
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods 03 Feb 2026, 23:07
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
SanketPatil
Hi KarishmaB

My confusion: To justify option B (presumably arguing Drafir's exports will increase when Pundra weakens), don't we need to assume all manufactured goods are currently being exported?

My reasoning:

Drafir might be at "peak production capacity" (100 goods)

But current exports could be lower (70 goods) due to market limits/competition

When Pundra weakens, Drafir could export more of its existing production (100; or anything more than 70/100) without needing extra capacity

Question: If this is true, why does peak production matter? Couldn't exports grow purely from market share gain, regardless of capacity status?

What logical gap am I missing, and how can I avoid this in CR questions?
Show more

A sector operates at the level at which the demand is for its products. If an economy consumes 100 units of laptops, the laptop manufacturers together will make 100 laptops over long term.
If an industry is operating at capacity, it means that it has capacity to make only 100 laptops and it is making and selling those. Increasing capacity requires high Capex and time.
Even if the outside economy demand for the laptops increases, the companies can still make 100 only (since they only have infra for making 100) which are meeting the current domestic demand. Typically industries export what doesn't get consumed domestically. If domestic demand is not met, the domestic price will rise and hence the manufacturer will have more incentive to sell domestically only.
So if the industry is operating at capacity, the probability that exports will increase meaningfully even if demand outside increases is low. That is why it weakens the plan - not destroys it, but weakens it.
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7399 posts
AbhishekP220108
Verbal Forum Moderator
705 posts